An Interpretation of Frida Kahlo

External hearts, nails in your skin, and vines growing out of your stomach. Would these be images you would use to represent your personal life? Frida Kahlo, the famous 20^th century Mexican painter, used exactly these things to describe hers. In the academic art history journal article “Life as Art/Art as Life: Dramatizing the Life and Work of Frida Kahlo,” the author believes that Kahlo’s intense emotions and overwhelming creative spirit were the driving force of her “genius” art. Her surrealist paintings fascinate the masses because of her not-so-evident thought processes. On the other hand, a different author from the New York Review of Books isn’t as complimentary. He recognizes Kahlo’s artistic talent in his article “The Nerve of Frida Kahlo,” but he is not afraid to acknowledge her obscurity, and he finds her constant physical and emotional pain somewhat depressing and gory. These art critics both recognize that Frida’s inspiration comes from a personal level, but they look at her work from different standpoints and therefore have different reactions to her paintings.

Most critics shower Kahlo’s art with undying praise, so it was difficult to find a critic who does not. Many professionals in the art community give bonus points for creativity and even more brownies points if you can make the viewer say “huh??” Only hints of such a reaction are provided in “The Nerve of Frida Kahlo”. Both authors acknowledge the fact that the inspiration of Kahlo’s paintings comes from a personal level; just one is more apt to report how this can become disturbing. Every artist wants their viewer to be filled with emotion, but was Frida really shooting for horror in her paintings? Obviously, art is all about opinions and the author of “The Nerve of Frida Kahlo”, like many viewers of Kahlo’s paintings, is mainly intrigued by her thought processes and the events that must have had to take place in order for such images to appear in her creative spectrum. He also hints at her self-obsession, seeing as how in almost every painting she is the center of attention. He criticizes the lack of “wide-ranging experience” in her paintings. Although each painting is unique with its masses of emotion and symbolism, most of them turn out to be depressing and angst-y.

The article entitled “Life as Art/Art as Life: Dramatizing the Life and Work of Frida Kahlo” looks at Kahlo’s work from a more academic standpoint. Obviously the writer is a fan of hers, but she genuinely researches the background of Frida and why she paints the way she paints. The author of this article very accurately states how “Frida’s viewpoint is expressionistically distorted; hence when she paints what she sees, she is intuitively a surrealist. These scenes effectively undercut the intellectuality and intentionality that characterize creativity in the arts.” When she isn’t being Frida Fan #1 (I bet that’s her screen name or something), she looks into the emotions of Kahlo and the life experiences incorporated into her paintings. Each picture is related to a life story, a sad challenge that Frida had to face in life.

When it comes to legitimacy and credibility, I would give the “Life as Art/Art as Life: Dramatizing the Life and Work of Frida Kahlo” a better grade. I believe this article, but the positivity eventually becomes mundane. “The Nerve of Frida Kahlo” is more entertaining to read, but it is mostly comprised of opinions and summaries, not hard evidence. Then again, that’s what art is all about, isn’t it? Opinions? Although her work is at times depressing, there is no denying the fact that Frida Kahlo used her personal life experiences and resulting emotions as inspiration for her work, an idea that was demonstrated in both articles.